• bassomitron@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    2 days ago

    Not to mention a huge chunk of those Pokemon at that time were just evolution phases, sharing very similar names as their base (e.g. Charmander, Charmeleon, and then Charizard). Additionally, each evolution phase looks pretty similar to the prior. That in comparison to, say, many different varieties of ants, wasps, birds, etc. that don’t look that different at a distance, especially to an 8-year-old.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Don’t forget the mimic species that evolution selected for because they look like something else. Even the most complex video game is nothing compared to nature’s complexity. I’d love to learn about geology, but look at how many variations there are in just one group of minerals. Biochemistry is the real misleading one - “I’m just a few types of atoms” Yeah, in a shitload of combinations.

      • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        And all pokemon of a species usually look the same! Very few gendered traits, age differences (unless you count evolution, and that still counts for more species in pokemon than irl), season differences, plain old individual differences, etc.